ORCID Profile
0000-0002-6100-3999
Current Organisation
Charles Darwin University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 26-12-2018
DOI: 10.1017/AEE.2018.38
Publisher: Common Ground Research Networks
Date: 2019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 19-05-2016
Publisher: Common Ground Research Networks
Date: 2014
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 24-07-2016
Abstract: Traditionally, assessment for university students in the humanities has been in an essay format, but this has changed extensively in the last decade. Assessments now may entail auditory and visual presentations, films, mind-maps, and other modes of communication. These formats are outside the established conventions of humanities and may be considered as creative works. Exploring definitions and research in the field of assessment of creativity, highlighting ways to explicitly assess the creative aspects of student work. An obligatory first year common unit titled “Cultural intelligence and capability” is examined as a model of how creative assessment can be used to extend engagement with subject material. Implications of considering creative aspects, in an explicit way, are reviewed. The underpinning argument is that in the current learning settings, creativity should be seen as an intrinsic part of appraisal criteria in the humanities as much as in the arts.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 20-11-2014
DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2014.924792
Abstract: In the process of developing short films with women in Australian Aboriginal (Yolŋu) communities in northeast Arnhem Land, questions arose about how the content and the process of production were defined and adjusted to suit both parties. This research examines how filmmakers take roles as health educators and how Yolŋu women as the "actors" define and direct the film. It explores ways that the filmmakers tried to ensure that Yolŋu identity was maintained in a biomedical agenda through the use of storytelling in language. An important dialogue develops regarding ownership and negotiation of health information and knowledge, addressing this intersection in a way that truly characterizes the spirit of community-based participatory research. Although the filmmaking processes were initially analyzed in the context of feminist and educational empowerment theories, we conclude that Latour's (2005) theory of actor networks leads to a more coherent way to explore participatory filmmaking as a health education tool. The analysis in this work provides a framework to integrate health communication, Indigenous women's issues, and filmmaking practices. In contrasting participatory filmmaking with health promotion and ethnographic film, the importance of negotiating the agenda is revealed.
Publisher: Common Ground Research Networks
Date: 2007
No related grants have been discovered for Birut Zemits.